U.S. Supreme Court redistricting orders create political ‘nightmare’ in Texas

This report was written by Brian Chasnoff of the San Antonio Express-News, with additional reporting by E-N staff writer Nolan Hicks.

Learning late Friday that the U.S. Supreme Court had frozen the state’s legislative and congressional elections, Bexar County Tax Assessor-Collector Sylvia Romo initially panicked.

“I thought, ‘Oh my God, what a political nightmare this is,’” she said.

Before Friday’s stay, Romo had decided to run in Congressional District 35, a new district drawn by a panel of federal judges in San Antonio that had created interim maps because those drawn by the Legislature this year remain mired in court.

A panel of federal judges in Washington announced Monday that it would hold a full trial from Jan. 17 to 26 to determine if the state’s maps comply with the most basic requirements of the Voting Rights Act.

But in granting a request by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott to temporarily block the interim maps, the nation’s highest court left candidates across the state uncertain where and when they’re competing, even in the midst of a filing period that ends Thursday.

“In the time that I’ve worked on campaigns, I’ve never seen a redistricting process that’s been as drawn out as this initially,” said Christian Anderson, a local political consultant with four clients affected by the order. “It makes things so difficult for everyone, from candidates to the people who conduct the elections. We’re far enough along in the calendar that we don’t need any uncertainty about the mechanics of conducting an election.”

The court in San Antonio court will hold a hearing today to discuss moving the candidate filing deadlines and other logistical concerns of holding the 2012 primaries, which are scheduled for March 6.

For candidates in local races, reactions have been similar to Romo’s: disorientation followed by resolve to keep going in the face of disorder.

“I’m going to stay on course,” Romo said. “I’m going to campaign (in the 35th), and once they make the decision, I’ll decide which way I’m going to go.”

Former Rep. Ciro Rodriguez (Express-News photo)

Under the interim maps, Romo, 68, would face former U.S. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez in the Democratic primary. Rodriguez said Monday that he’d run in any district that encompasses his South Side home. Having sought three different districts in the past 14 years, Rodriguez, 65, took the uncertainty in stride.

“I’ve never shopped around,” he said. “Whether it’s the 23rd, whether it’s the 35th — whatever number they want to provide it, the constituency is still the same, my residency is still the same.”

But running in the 23rd could prove a tougher primary fight for Rodriguez, who would face veteran state Rep. Pete Gallego, D-Alpine, in a district that stretches from San Antonio to El Paso.

The political ambiguity has derailed the fundraising schedule of local real estate broker Patrick Shearer, 36, who announced his candidacy for the 35th District the day before the Supreme Court’s order.

“I’m not going to ask my supporters to commit funds in these difficult economic times with so much uncertainty about the race,” Shearer said. “I’ve asked them to wait until the Supreme Court decision has been made.”

“Our attitude is ‘onward,’” she said. “And obviously, if we don’t know what the lines are, we’re just going to go to areas that overlap in the two maps.”

Torres, 44, said that means campaigning in a “big, big area,” one that encompasses precincts in South Bexar County included in the Legislature’s original map. Her opponent, former City Councilman Philip Cortez, is taking a more wary approach.

“I think we’re just going to wait and see what areas need to be hit and which ones don’t,” Cortez said. “I know which district I’m going to be running in. I’m just curious which residents I need to be communicating my message to.”

Beyond bemusement, Cortez, 33, also expressed frustration.

“I think it’s unfortunate that the U.S. Supreme Court is having to handle our redistricting business,” he said. “If the Republican-controlled House and Senate would have done it right this past session and given the seats to the areas that had this growth in Census numbers, we wouldn’t be here right now. We wouldn’t be here the week of the filing deadline not knowing who’s running where, and what area’s in and what area’s out, and candidates across the board trying to figure out, ‘Am I in the district or not?’”

The groups claim that such a proposal would disenfranchise minority voters by greatly reducing expected turnout.

“Hope they move entire primary to May rather than split it. Would cost counties twice as much to hold 2 primaries,” tweeted Wade Emmert, the chairman of the Dallas County Republican Party.

In the wake of the stay, Democratic advisers are telling candidates to file to run by the current deadline of Thursday, unless the court in San Antonio temporarily suspends or moves back the deadline.

“Unless you’re giving up an office, you might as well go ahead and file,” said Jeff Crosby, a longtime Democratic strategist. “If you don’t, you run the risk of your opponents trying to exploit it.”

Yet the Supreme Court’s order, delivered in a single paragraph, told the groups involved in the redistricting fight to prepare for oral arguments before the court Jan. 9, rendering the filing deadline potentially meaningless.

“You barely know what you’re running for at this point,” said Dan Debauche, campaign manager for Torres. “There’s no map right now. There are literally no districts to run in.”